Event Comment: The King's Company. There is no indication of the date of the first performance, but a licensing date of 6 April 1677 and the large number of minor actors in the cast suggest a Lenten performance. Preface to edition of 1677: I think (without Ostentation) never was House more throng'd;...The first, second, and other times it was Acted, I think lost me no Credit, but...Fortune...Jaded me, robbing me of the Honour of my Plays continuance for that time; by a Mischance which hapned to one, whose Part was too considerable to be quickly studied

Event Comment: The King's Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@141, p. 359: The Rivall Queene. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 346. That this is the premiere is indicated by a letter from the Marquis of Worcester to the Marchioness, 17 March 1676@7: Sir Charles Sedley's Cleopatra has been acted often, and to-day a new play of the death of Alexander, but I have not been to see either, living a mighty drudging life (HMC, 12th Report, Appendix, Beaufort MSS., IX, 66). Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, p. 11), has a cast which agrees (except for omissions) with that in the edition of 1677. Downes adds (p. 16): [Hart in] Alexander, towards the latter End of his Acting; if he Acted in any one of these but once in a Fortnight, the House was fill'd as at a New Play, especially Alexander, he Acting that with such Grandeur and Agreeable Majesty, That one of the Court was pleas'd to Honour him with this Commendation; That Hart might Teach any King on Earth how to Comport himself

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. There is considerable uncertainty as to the date of production of this play. Because it was licensed for printing on 2 Aug. 1677, it was probably first acted not later than July 1677. Because some of the names in the cast represent younger actors, it has been thought to be a Lenten production (see Gray, Lenten Casts, pp. 789-90). It seems, however, that the play, because of its reference to performances by the French comedians (the Epilogue refers to "de French Troop at toder end o'Town ") and the offering of Rare en Tout on29 May 1677, probably was acted in June 1677. The Prologue also refers to the comedy as The Women's Play," suggesting that it was produced for the actresses' annual benefit

Event Comment: The King's Company. The date of the first production is uncertain, but John Harold Wilson (Six Restoration Play-Dates, pp. 221-22) assigns it to mid-June primarily because of the Prologue intended to be spoken by Haines and the order, dated 18 June 1677, for the arrest of Haines for speaking an obscene Epilogue (error for Prologue?); in addition, the next play at Drury Lane, The Rival Kings, refers to Haines and "last time," establishing the sequence of performance of these two plays. For the arrest of Haines, see Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 328n. Wits Led by the Nose was licensed for printing on 16 Aug. 1677

Event Comment: The King's Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but its listing in the Term Catalogues, November 1681, suggests late October as a likely latest date for its premiere. If Mithridates was acted in mid-October at the opening of Drury Lane, Sir Barnaby Whigg may well be the first new play offered by the King's Company in the autumn. A Song in Act I, Blow Boreas Blow, with music apparently by Henry Purcell, is in A Third Collection of New Songs...Words by Mr D'Urfey, 1685, and in Dramatic Works of Henry Purcell, Purcell Society, III (1917), xiv-xv

Event Comment: The King's Company. The date of the premiere is not certain. This performance is known from an entry in the Newdigate newsletters, which also states that Rollo was to be acted on the following Monday. If this statement is accurate, the performance of The Loyal Brother on 4 Feb. 1681@2 may be the third night rather than the opening performance. Newdigate newsletters, 4 Feb. 1681@2: On Monday morn [the Moorish Ambassador] & ye Comers meet to conclude ye treaty and in ye afternoon goes to see Rollo D. of Normandy at ye Ks playhouse wre ye K was this afternoon to see ye new play calld ye Loyall brothr (Wilson, More Theater Notes from the Newdigate Newsletters, p. 59). The Prologue and Epilogue were printed separately and have been reprinted in Wiley, Rare Prologues and Epilogues, pp. 70-72. Luttrell acquired his copies (Huntington Library) on 7 Feb. 1681@2. In The Life of John Dryden (Chapel Hill, 1961), Charles E. Ward believes (pp. 166, 355) that The Loyal Brother was first acted in the autumn of 1681; but the entry in the Newdigate newsletters seems to make February 1682 the more probable time

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of this revival is not known, but the fact that this edition was entered in the Term Catalogues, February 1683@4, makes it likely that the revival occurred not later than December 1683. A new song, There was a jolly beggar, in Act IV, Scene ii, was probably written for this revival. It was printed in Choice Ayres and Songs, the Fifth Book, 1684

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but the play was licensed 6 April 1687 in the Stationers' Register, 24 May 1687. The play was probably given first in March, as the Prologue refers to the speaking head, which was mentioned in the Newdigate newsletters (Folger Shakespeare Library), 26 March 1687: A Country man haveing invented a head & soe contrived it that whatever language or tune you speak in the Mouth of it it Repeated distinctly and Audibly. [I owe this reference to Professor John Harold Wilson]

Event Comment: The United Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@149, p. 368: The Queene a Box, and a Box for the Maids Honor at Don Sebastian King of Portugal. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 352. There is no certainly that this is the first performance. The play was entered in the Stationers' Register, 15 Dec. 1689. See also Charles E. Ward, The Life of John Dryden (Chapel Hill, N. C., 1961), pp. 242-46. Preface, Edition of 1690: I am...to acknowledge, with all manner of gratitude, their civility; who were pleas'd to endure it with so much patience....Above twelve hundred lines have been cut off from this tragedy since it was first deliver'd to the actors. They were indeed so judiciously lopt by Mr Betterton, to whose care and excellent action I am equall y oblig'd, that the connexion of the story was not lost. Does a cryptic remark by Huygens, 3 Dec. 1689 OS, refer to this play: Dat dat geklap met de handen in comedie, onlanxgebeurt, als er gesproken wierd van een Coning, die wederom quam in sign rijck, van seer quade consequentie was. Dat voorseker de Con. too mercifull was, en dat er mosten exempelen gestatueert werden (Journal van Constantijn Huygens, Dutch Historical Society Transactions, New Series, XXIII [Utrecht, 18-212)

Event Comment: The United Company. There is no certainty as to when the first performance occurred, but it can hardly be later than 11 Nov. 1690, when it was entered in the Stationers' Register; it was then advertised in the London Gazette, No. 2618, 11-15 Dec. 1690. On the assumption that the performance of Amphitryon on 21 Oct. 1690 followed its premiere, Distress'd Innocence has been assigned to late October 1690. The Overture and seven Act Tunes were composed by Henry Purcell. See Purcell's Works, Purcell Society, XVI (1906), xix. Dedication, Edition of 1691: I must still own my self indebted on all Hands, not only to the kind Audience, but likewise to the kind Company, who amongst other Favours, were pleased to be at the Charge of dressing my Play to so much Advantage. But above all I must make my publick Acknowledgments to Mr Betterton for his several extraordinary Hints to the heightening of my best Characters, nor am I a little indebted to Mr Montfort, for the last Scene of my Play which he was so kind to write for me

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but the Preface states:...the many inconveniences this hasty Peice has been expos'd to, as the Season of the being [sic] so near Christmas. [The Preface also refers to several scenes omitted in the action and expresses gratitude to Mountfort who wrote one scene of the fifth act.] This play was entered in the Term Catalogues, Feb. 1690@1

Event Comment: In L. C. 5@152, pp. 202, 220--see Boswell, Restoration Court Stage, p. 105--is a reference to a performance given jointly by both companies. As this was the customary date of the celebration of King William's birthday, this musical work was probably given on this day. The BM copy has a MS date of 29 Nov. 1697; and a dialogue from this work was noticed in the Post Boy, 30 Nov.-2 Dec. 1697. The music was composed by John Eccles

Event Comment: Rich's Company. Lady Morley attended this performance: Lady Morley and two in the Box at Constant Couple. See Hotson, Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, p. 378. There is no certainty that this is the first performance, but the fact that the play was advertised in the Post Man, 7-9 Dec. 1699, suggests that the first production may have occurred in mid-November. The Prologue also refers to the abandonment of Dorset Garden to "That strong Dog Sampson" (see 15 and 25 Nov. 1699). A song, Thus Damon knock'd at Celia's door, set by Daniel Purcell, was published separately about this time. Preface, Edition of 1700: All will join with me in Commendation of the Actors, and allow, without detracting from the Merit of others, that the Theatre Royal affords an excellent and compleat Set of Comedians. Mr Wilks's Performance has set him so far above Competition in the Part of Wildair, that none can pretend to envy the Praise due to his Merit. Preface to The Inconstant (1702): I remember, that about two Years ago, I had a Gentleman from France [The Constant Couple] that brought the Play-house some fifty Audiences in five months. A Comparison between the Two Stages (1702), p. 32: Critick: But above all, commend me to the ingenious Author of the Trip to the Jubilee. Ramble: Oh Lord, Sir! you won't quarrel with that Play; never any thing did such wonders. Critick: Oh 'twas admirable! admirable! I wonder the Town did not just then bespeak the Bays for him. Sullen: Nay, for ought you and I know, he may live to enjoy 'em; I assure you all the run of the Town is on his side. The Owl was never more esteem'd at Athens than the Trip to the Jubilee was here. Critick: Indeed I have known a Footman have a great stroak with his Lord at begging a Favour; if all the Footmen in Town that admire him were to club for his Preferment, I don't know what might be done. Ramble: The Footmen? Ay, and the middle Gallery too, I assure you are of his side, and that's a strong Party. Critick: Why, I believe it, 'tis about the pitch of their Understanding; but if ever it diverted one Man of tolerable Sense I'll be hang'd. Sullen: I don't know who are your People of tolerable Sense, Mr Critick, but at the play I have seen the Pit, Box and Stage so crowded--and if that is not a sign